[quote="dissent1, post:71, topic:285, full:true"]
How's your experience using irqbalance by the way?
[/quote]I tried it and looked into network traffic thrgouhput results with "flent" for various QoS strategies in SQM (simple, layer_cake) as the simple/fq_codel has a strange miscalculation due to poor HTB performance (like I have discussed earlier).
Using irqbalance improved throughput somewhat, but as my ISP connection does not fully consume the CPU power, there is not that much difference. I used 90/8 Mbit/s limits:
90 / 8 / latency
cake irqbalance 85,6 / 6.1 / 18
simple default (33) 80.5 / 6.4 / 20
simple affinity 1-2 81.2 / 6.2 / 20
simple irqbalance 81.4 / 6.4 / 19
Changing eth0/eth1 affinity from the default 3-3 to 1-2 already improved download thoughput slightly (by 0.7 Mb/s) but hurt upload a bit, and then irqbalance further improved both directions marginally.
I have not tested how IRQs would behave with wifi traffic.
Irqbalance moved IRQs during the test several times and to my surprise actually moved eth0 and eth1 to the same affinity. It apparently balanced them against some other IRQs that were relevant to the traffic.
The impact from irqbalance was so small that I did not install it into my build by default. If I had a connection that would fully consume the CPU, then it might have more use.